Make death mean something.

[Connor_Graham]

I'm not asking for it to be like Siege... at all.

Oh really?

Siege is a great example

That is the equivalent of holding Siege up and saying "This is what it should be like".

Any more words of wisdom?


This is an item based game. You don't make people lose hard won items in an item based game. It's bad for business.

 

[Draxous]

I'm not asking for it to be like Siege... at all.

Oh really?

Siege is a great example

That is the equivalent of holding Siege up and saying "This is what it should be like".

Any more words of wisdom?


This is an item based game. You don't make people lose hard won items in an item based game. It's bad for business.

That would be "you" taking my words out of context.

Siege is a great example of how the economy in this game could work rather than be broken, hyper inflated and absolutely worthless... as it currently is on every other shard besides Siege.


So, since you would like some more words of wisdom... how's this?


This isn't about making the other shards like Siege... this is about fixing the broken systems of this game that are ruining it for everyone.

 

[Mr Fix It]

not a good idea at all i like it the way it is now.

 

[Connor_Graham]

This isn't about making the other shards like Siege... this is about fixing the broken systems of this game that are ruining it for everyone.

Really? I'd thought you said it was about this:

This is about balancing risk vs reward in Ultima Online...

The current system isn't broken, and the risk of death is losing the time it takes to get back into the game.

Once again, this is an item based game. Unless you can replace an item with EXACTLY the same one, and do so quickly and inexpensively, you can't put in systems that cause those items to break.

I would have thought those nifty 10th anniversary items that can break that no one ever uses would have pretty much proven how much players want that type of system in game.

If you want to fix the economy, get rid of scripters and dupers.

 

[Traveller]

The current system isn't broken, and the risk of death is losing the time it takes to get back into the game.

*points and laugh*

Connor, you are perfectly entitled to like the game like it is now, and to say so, no issue about that. But:

"The current system isn't broken"... come on. Gold farming is rampant, and once an item enter the game it never leaves it. That makes midlevel crafting useless. If the whole economy/crafting isn't broken I don't know what is. Thank god I am playing a game with a REAL economy instead of the sorry excuse that UO has become.

"the risk of death is losing the time it takes to get back into the game"... Which is how much? Something between 20 sec and 2 mins, usually. An awful risk, really.

Connor, I can understand that you like the game as it is, and prefer it to be like it is now. But really, hiding the problems behind the carpet won't make them go away, it's much more hones to say "ok, the economy is broken, death is no risk, but I don't care about it.".

BTW, I do.

 

[ShadowJack]

How about no insurance and non item based pvp




Higher skills total - win
Skills are equal - luck/talent win
better connection - win





and I think the powerscroll thing is stupid. I'd do away with that and let people 120 automatically(considering you can't just go back to 100 skill levels after all of that crap)



And I'd make UO 80%pvp



farming npc critters should be for crafters and gold to buy crafted weps...etc



oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked, but they still felt the need to put in insurance and uber gear for the 8 year olds who are afraid to die, and the people who like looking at themselves and the items more than playing



crap/gm/power/vanq/invuln/etc... simple and fine.


This is about the only game I've ever seen that needs to de-evolve in order to survive.





And personally....(I know a lot of people will love this)

I think the different races are stupid

all of them.


Then when the game is simplified enough, they can stop changing it so much so that you don't have to change your char skills to stay on top. you can just do it for fun. Pvp all in all should be a rock paper scissors for the magic and wep users

 

[ShadowJack]

Or just take away insurance and make the high end gear about as common as ex acc silver vanq kats used to be



then when people lose it, they wont have to worry about it, a few hundred k will buy a new one. The economy is f'in crazy compared to what it used to be.


I'd save the millions of gold transactions for houses, rares, and such, not stuff you need to be competitive in the pvp field in fel.

 

[Connor_Graham]

oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked,

You're right.




Oh wait.


No, you're not. Even the guy that created it said it failed.

Go figure huh?

 

[Draxous]

This is about balancing risk vs reward in Ultima Online...

The current system isn't broken, and the risk of death is losing the time it takes to get back into the game.

Once again, this is an item based game. Unless you can replace an item with EXACTLY the same one, and do so quickly and inexpensively, you can't put in systems that cause those items to break.

Which is what I'm saying too. If crafters have the ability to craft useful items... then this proposal would work.

You are wrong and as usual, you can't handle being so.

 

[Connor_Graham]

You are wrong and as usual, you can't handle being so.

Keep telling yourself that. You might actually talk yourself into it.

And btw, since you missed it earlier...


There's no such thing as an economy when there's an infinite amount of currency.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

hmmm...

Death:

pots looted? ....check
arrows/bolts/bandies looted? ...check
apples eaten? ...check
poop talk/corpse stomping? ...check
6K+ lost in insurance? ...check

seems to me death already does mean something. it means you have to go get supplies for starters...kinda like you had to BEFORE insurance...minus the suits.

with that in mind it seems to me all you are after is the other guys suit in which case go play seige and have a coke and a smile. thanks.

/thread

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

So this is your "I don't have anything to say" post?

I'm not asking for it to be like Siege... at all. This is about balancing risk vs reward in Ultima Online...

Um yes...you are asking things to be similar to seige.

risk vs. reward? in PvP.....ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFLES!!! dying isnt enough?

 

[Thorodin]

I don't really understand how you think this proposal would be better. You want more risk from death than the loss of fame, karma, and insurance money, but you want people to be able to be easily able to craft the exact type of benefits to weapons and armor they desire. I don't think that is how imbueing is going to work. If it were there would actually be even less risk to being killed. You lose your favorite piece of equipmenet, instead of losing the insurance money you lose the item, but just go and make another one just like it with your crafter character. But we all know this is not going to possibly happen.

 

[Draxous]

I don't really understand how you think this proposal would be better. You want more risk from death than the loss of fame, karma, and insurance money, but you want people to be able to be easily able to craft the exact type of benefits to weapons and armor they desire. I don't think that is how imbueing is going to work. If it were there would actually be even less risk to being killed. You lose your favorite piece of equipmenet, instead of losing the insurance money you lose the item, but just go and make another one just like it with your crafter character. But we all know this is not going to possibly happen.

See... that's the thing.

You lose you the items that you use and have to restock or get to your body in time IF and only IF you decide to keep escalating the RISK. The Reward... is the possibility of victory against your opponent!

Under this proposal, we will STILL have item insurance. The difference is-is that players will no longer be able to abuse it in order to continue fighting-forever, essentially. Which is what is happening right now... and why people are proposing "PvP sickness" which is so lame, because its an automatic time out... just like factions.

Risk versus Reward is not scaled properly at all under our current system.

 

[Draxous]

hmmm...

Death:

pots looted? ....check
arrows/bolts/bandies looted? ...check
apples eaten? ...check
poop talk/corpse stomping? ...check
6K+ lost in insurance? ...check

insured or blessed quivers
talisman of bandage summoning
100%LRC suits
insured weapons and armor

Death does nothing to stop you from continuing the fight. Things like being looted or statloss... however do.

Nice try, though.

 

[It Lives]

So I die and cant play again for 20 minutes.

............No thanks.......

 

[Draxous]

So I die and cant play again for 20 minutes.

............No thanks.......

Who said that?

Certainly, not I.

You die, res and your items would be insured as they are now. The only difference is that you cannot die more than 3 times without renewing your item insurance at a town or your own home. If you do, your items are no longer insured.

So, to recap for all practical purposes; what this system needs in order to work:

Artifacts (all named items... marties, tok arties, ML arties, etc. etc.) are all blessed and unrepairable and unable to be powder of fortified.

Armor and weapons are completely customizable, competitive and created by players (crafters.) making any item replaceable with a little bit of time and effort.

Factions, would allow players to bless their items, instead of insure them. For this totally awesome reward, players in factions risk engaging in battle on every facet and the prospects of stat-loss.

Players can still insure their items. They can renew the number of times their items are insured at any town or in their own home. The total number of times any item can be insured for, before needing another visit to a town or your home is 3. So, after your 3rd death... if you have not renewed your insurance... your items will no longer be insured. This will add risk to carelessly and repeatedly dying and going back into battle.


The idea is-is that each death, means something to the vitality of your character.

Risk versus Reward, would actually be scaled to an appropriate level and not only that, but it will have additional benefits to crafters, PvPers, monster hunters and casual players too.

It's a win, win scenario and thus far... the only people who oppose it, give no reasons or just don't understand what is being proposed at all...

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

It's a win, win scenario and thus far... the only people who oppose it, give no reasons or just don't understand what is being proposed at all...

ok...so because you didnt read it or didnt agree to the reasons they dont exist in the thread?

lmao...logic by brute force of nuh-uh...classic.

btw...its pretty creepy watching you troll your own thread...go read a book or something.

 

[Shanna]

See, in a perfect UO, rez killing is nonexistent. But it's very much existent. And all you need to be on a POPULATED shard and have a red rk you as you rez up in town to re insure your stuff (like you suggested). Now you're stuff is gone.


And btw, your proposal for the crafters section is ridculous. Guess what. Earning that val hammer or Barbed kit takes A LOT of time. What you're saying is that crafters should have to work more because people are going to be griefed killed so often and loose their items. This is only going to give scriptors and dupers more power because they can MAGICALLY get 10 val hammers and 20 barbed kits into the market in no time.

If you're a Siege player, keep your suggestions to Siege. Thank you.

 

[Nexus]

So this is your "I don't have anything to say" post?

I'm not asking for it to be like Siege... at all. This is about balancing risk vs reward in Ultima Online...

Um yes...you are asking things to be similar to seige.

risk vs. reward? in PvP.....ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOFLES!!! dying isnt enough?

And what are you loosing by dying? A few pots? Some bandies and insurance gold...Big risk there......control of a spawn that you'll make up at another time.

I agree that Death needs to mean something, just dying isn't enough, there is ZERO risk to being killed in PvP or PvM for that matter. With Reds having access to towns now, and no stat loss the downsides to PvP have gone away...Now you PvPer's are showing your true colors your just as Care Bear and Pixel Crack junkified as everyone else.

 

[Violence]

You're still at it.. Just drop it.
I don't see anyone seriously considering what you're saying except crafters who really meant to subscribe to Sims Online and dedicated PvMers with a mind to destroy PvP through reverse psychology because we don't shop 24/7.. LOL.

 

[Belmarduk]

Risk versus Reward.

Where ?
Remove insurance and no recalling out except in a few locations. THAT makes pvp interesting

 

[Traveller]

Remove insurance and no recalling out except in a few locations. THAT makes pvp interesting

I do agree. But after all we play the same game...

 

[Traveller]

oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked,

Even the guy that created it said it failed.

Connor, here you are flatly wrong. ShadowJack mentioned the skill/item system of old UO, not the usual noncon-pvp debate (which was what LB was talking about).

You weren't here before AoS, but I thought that even you knew that the old skill/item system has been here a lot of time after the tram/fel split.

 

[Sarphus]

I love Siege =P

I think Siege is great and should be no item insurance at all.

I'm not thinking that for the rest of UO. I'm thinking of taking advantage of having item insurance to help employ player professions. Spark player interactions. Balance risk vs reward. Give casual players a reason to play and enjoy UO (lots of people have families and jobs and being left in the dust because of it, rather than enjoying your time spent grinding... is lame.)


Bring back the community, damnit!

=[

well here's the thing... Siege is a great shard, but it also proves that a majority of the playerbase doesn't want to play under the ruleset you're proposing. If your proposal was good for UO, Siege would be a heavily populated shard. It's not (on both counts).

I don't need to pick apart your idea to show it's a bad one. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the high risk playstyle, which is why I play on siege sometimes. I just don't think forcing everyone to play under that ruleset would help UO.

A change as you propose could only result in a net loss in UO subscriptions, which is bad for UO.

 

[THP]

mmmm its a great point....dying in UO really doesnt matter anymore...so whats a few k in insurance..like the op says it a mere hinderance...

maybe insurance needs to be x10 or more???

oh then again that would be like real life...only helps the rich...dang

 

[Connor_Graham]

oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked,

Even the guy that created it said it failed.

Connor, here you are flatly wrong. ShadowJack mentioned the skill/item system of old UO, not the usual noncon-pvp debate (which was what LB was talking about).

You weren't here before AoS, but I thought that even you knew that the old skill/item system has been here a lot of time after the tram/fel split.

Maybe you should actually READ his post. Since you didn't, I'll help you out with a few key quotes:


"And I'd make UO 80%pvp "


"oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked"

"This is about the only game I've ever seen that needs to de-evolve in order to survive"


There ya go. That's how you quote within context. I hope you were keeping notes.

 

[Traveller]

Maybe you should actually READ his post. Since you didn't, I'll help you out with a few key quotes:


"And I'd make UO 80%pvp "


"oh wait, that's how it used to be and it worked"

"This is about the only game I've ever seen that needs to de-evolve in order to survive"


There ya go. That's how you quote within context. I hope you were keeping notes.

Good grief, man, are you seriously THAT biased? All right, let's mention all the stuff you left out ("quote within context", sure... Do you actually believe what you said?):

"How about no insurance and non item based pvp
Higher skills total - win
Skills are equal - luck/talent win
better connection - win

and I think the powerscroll thing is stupid. I'd do away with that and let people 120 automatically(considering you can't just go back to 100 skill levels after all of that crap)

And I'd make UO 80%pvp

farming npc critters should be for crafters and gold to buy crafted weps...etc

crap/gm/power/vanq/invuln/etc... simple and fine.

I think the different races are stupid"

Of this, the ONLY quote relative to noncon-pvp, and the only one to which your quote of LB is appliable is the "And I'd make UO 80%pvp", which is about 10% of what he wrote. All the rest was there long after tram/fel split. Still you chose to ignore all the rest. This my friend means being awfully biased in the best case, or trolling in the worst. Sorry to say that, you usually make much better points than those i can read in this thread.

 

[Connor_Graham]

His entire post was a list of pre Trammel UO, with a few tweaks thrown in. That's it. That's what failed, as I said.

 

[Nexus]

I don't want Production Shards going to a similar to Siege ruleset, but...I do want to see some actual risk go into Risk vs Reward. Seriously when you can pop up and be back in the fight in under 2 minutes after dying while on a raid where's the risk? When you can pop back into a fight at yew gate or where ever in under 2 minutes after dying where's the risk? Risk is gone in Fel as much as the PvP community loves to spout out "Risk vs Reward !" as their mantra. I play a thief in fel, what disadvantages/risk vs benifits/rewards do I have? Well lets see....

Risks

1. I can call guards if I'm not flagged in GZ - Anyone but Reds can do that
2. I can Flag Grey preforming a negative action on a Red - No one else does.
3. I can't give Murder counts - Anyone but Thieves and Reds can give counts.
4. I have to play a much more cramped Template to be successful - Very true with passive Reveal on Prodo Shards I need 400 points just in just base skills to provide ways to steal and avoid detection. There is less freedom in build.
5. Insurance actually is a Nerf to my playstyle - it was a Boon for everyone else as they couldn't lose their oh so important suits and weapons. Coming up Empty is more common than any success.

Now those are Risks to my play style...here's some Rewards.

• 2, 3, 4 ,5 ,6, 10 vs 1 are fair odds actually 4 vs 1 and lower puts the odds in my favor at spawns. And I don't take what I can get usually I take what I want.
• Template is pretty much self maintaining...I need something sooner or later it turns up for free.
• I don't have to buy 200mil gold suits to be "competitive" I could be just as effective running around almost naked.

Now lets look at a Red PvPer
RISKS

• Attackable on site anywhere - No Guard Zone benifits
• Can't give counts

Rewards

• Not really anything special about them.

Blue PvPers are in the same boat with the exception that they can give counts, and have the benefits of Guard Zone

Even with Thieves having more down sides to their play style and the game mechanics set against them I'm all for Death Meaning something. Death even with more of what people would consider "Risks" death is meaningless as I don't loose anything taking the true risk out of the game. Stat loss was good, I wouldn't mind seeing it brought back with a temporary Skill loss added for Reds. For both I'd love to see if your killed more than (x) number of times in Fel in a day you can't Rez for 30 minutes, killed again then it's another 30, of course there would have to be a guard against Rez Kills say your deaths have to be 5 minutes apart to count.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

...
A percentage chance (equal to your active murder counts, not to exceed 99%) that if you die as a red, and the killer is a blue character (NOT a pet, a wild monster, or even a fellow red or gray), the character is deleted (along with all blessed/insured items). The corpse remains, lootable with the normal restrictions by anyone wanting to risk turning gray.
...

Apparently several didn't OR CHOSE to not get it.

Anything short of Perma Death means DEATH HAS NO MEANING..

A fundamental perception in the Original UO was PLAYER JUSTICE.
A fundamental perception in the Original UO was EVIL IS REQUIRED TO ACTIVATE A COMMUNITY.

(* NOTE THE PAST TENSE ... WAS ... *)

Now how can there ever be PLAYER JUSTICE when there is 0 AS IN ZERO PLAYER ACCOUNTABILITY? Sure Sp has one character per account BUT
a) does it limit you to a SINGLE ACCOUNT?
b) does it implement UNIQUE NAMES?

So even on SP, there is NOT 100% Player Accountability.

Given the above there is a way to Implement PLAYER JUSTICE. It is called PERMA DEATH. This was debated / Flamed many times in the first year of UO on CoB (Cross Roads of Brittania). The PKR's NEVER BOUGHT IN TO IT and whined about how much time it would take them to REBUILD/REDO their character.

So what you have is the Psychotic Serial Griefing PKR, PKING Miners, Trades people getting killed and SAYING THAT IS PLAYER JUSTICE then within 15 minutes be right back out there PKING Miners, Trades people etc. THAT IS THEIR VERSION OF PLAYER JUSTICE.

This is THE PKR version of how things should be. A player mouths off to them, they kill them, the player rez's and mouths off again REPEAT 1000 TIMES. Yeah man that was a load of fun wasn't it.

NOW TRANSLATED TO NON PKR SPEAK. A PKR Rez Kills a player repeatedly and then gets killed, rez's and then REZ KILLS A PLAYER REPEATEDLY.

Perma Death for the AGGRESSOR WILL RESOLVE THIS. It will PUT A BITE INTO DECIDING TO BE THE AGGRESSOR. IT WILL GIVE MEANING TO THE CHOICE. IT WILL GET THE ADRENALIN PUMPING FOR BOTH SIDES.

 

[Connor_Graham]

Dude, you should seriously consider taking a step back from the computer and heading outside for some fresh air.

 

[ShadowJack]

perma death is stupid, I hate Final Fantasy XI for losing exp when you die (everyone dies)


and player justice didn't work, because the people who were getting killed would flame the forums instead of taking the time to build chars (and there was always a place to do this away from pks) and learning the game. Instead the game got softer and softer, wider and wider options, and as a result it's falling apart.


The game needs to progress, but any game that changes your style of play 4-5 times a year due to nerfs and gameplay changes kinda sucks

When pub 16 (and I know I fuss too much about it) it killed about 10 finished chars I had on atl/cats


I was finally going to be able to play the game without skill grind, and you know, it was nice while it lasted.


The UO devs have never been able to make the game balanced.

 

[Traveller]

His entire post was a list of pre Trammel UO, with a few tweaks thrown in.

Sorry, but no. You might not be aware of it, but his entire post was a list of pre-AoS UO with only 10% being pre-trammel stuff. Really connor, do not mix aos with ren...

That's it.

No. That's what you chose to believe. But 90% of the stuff he quoted was still alive at pub16 (which introduced PS), and 80% was still online before AoS. If you wanted to reply only to that 10% you should have quoted it specifically, instead of dismissing the whole message.

 

[Draxous]

I love Siege =P

I think Siege is great and should be no item insurance at all.

I'm not thinking that for the rest of UO. I'm thinking of taking advantage of having item insurance to help employ player professions. Spark player interactions. Balance risk vs reward. Give casual players a reason to play and enjoy UO (lots of people have families and jobs and being left in the dust because of it, rather than enjoying your time spent grinding... is lame.)


Bring back the community, damnit!

=[

well here's the thing... Siege is a great shard, but it also proves that a majority of the playerbase doesn't want to play under the ruleset you're proposing. If your proposal was good for UO, Siege would be a heavily populated shard. It's not (on both counts).

For starters, Siege was extremely populated until the Developers gave the players the impression they didn't care about the shard or the shards issues. We lost 75% of the population in such a short amount of time because the developers at the time didn't feel like fixing GAME STOPPING issues... NOT because that playstyle isn't popular.

Even Felucca, on EVERY shard in Ultima Online was heavily populated until Age of Shadows... I wonder... why?

I don't need to pick apart your idea to show it's a bad one. Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the high risk playstyle, which is why I play on siege sometimes. I just don't think forcing everyone to play under that ruleset would help UO.

You don't need to pick apart my idea to show that it's a bad one?

Then you tell me that this idea is forcing everyone to play under "that ruleset" which is not what this idea is about and makes about as much sense as your reason why Siege no longer has a large population.

No facts, and this is just your baseless opinion without any explanation.

Good Job.

A change as you propose could only result in a net loss in UO subscriptions, which is bad for UO.

Wrong. This would if anything, increase subscriptions.

Crafters who enjoy crafting, would once again enjoy playing this game rather than grinding out carpal tunnel in heartwood or scripting bods.

Casual players who don't spend all day every day logged in grinding the hell out of this game would be able to compete with established players because items would be more readily available.

Current players will enjoy the same system they currently enjoy with a minor tweak to it, making it more rewarding and more interactive.

PvPers will enjoy PvPing because item insurance won't be abused to the point people are constantly going after them with no real breaks or down time even after they just won the fight against their opponent.

Monster hunters will enjoy hunting in doom, ML dungeons, so on and so forth because the "named items" we obtain in this game will still be useful and not only that, unrepairable which means there will always be a demand for more.


The points you make are really baseless. There are more playstyles that have enjoyed playing Ultima Online besides the Trammel, monster basher whos online 20hours a day 7 days a week. The developers focusing the content added to this game towards people who just don't understand how this game is designed or supposed to work have ostracized and chased away a huge portion of the playerbase that Ultima Online otherwise could of retained.

Like I said before:

The only people who disagree with this proposal, don't have an actual reason or just don't understand what is really being proposed.


Thanks for proving that point.

I don't need to pick apart your idea to show it's a bad one.

 

[Draxous]

See, in a perfect UO, rez killing is nonexistent. But it's very much existent. And all you need to be on a POPULATED shard and have a red rk you as you rez up in town to re insure your stuff (like you suggested). Now you're stuff is gone.

Say... what?

You do realize that if you are res-killed, then it was your fault... not the person who res-killed you?

...

You allowed it to happen.

Further more, items would be pretty easily replaceable in this proposal... so if you really did lose your items, then you can easily get new ones.

And red pks can't follow you into Trammel...

Artifacts, minor artifacts, ML artifacts, so on and so forth... would all be blessed, so I'm not really sure how you would lose those.

And if you go for the ultimate risk and join factions... you can bless ALL of your gear... so if you get res-killed... stat loss is the only real penalty you will pay.

And btw, your proposal for the crafters section is ridculous. Guess what. Earning that val hammer or Barbed kit takes A LOT of time. What you're saying is that crafters should have to work more because people are going to be griefed killed so often and loose their items. This is only going to give scriptors and dupers more power because they can MAGICALLY get 10 val hammers and 20 barbed kits into the market in no time.

If you're a Siege player, keep your suggestions to Siege. Thank you.

Why is it ridiculous? And why should earning a val hammer or barbed kit take so much time and effort? Because that's the way it currently is? Well, I want to change that.

And why should crafting a decent item people will used have to be such a damn grind fest that takes FOREVER?

Nothing you said is at all true with regards to this proposal. People are sick and tired of grinding, grinding, grinding, grinding, grinding and getting no where.

It doesn't have to be that way and you need to reread what I wrote, very carefully.

 

[Connor_Graham]

Wrong. This would if anything, increase subscriptions.

You're right. I should have realized that since you can lose your items in WoW that it would work in UO too and bring back scores of players.

Oh wait.


That's right.....you can't.

 

[EnigmaMaitreya]

perma death is stupid, I hate Final Fantasy XI for losing exp when you die (everyone dies)


and player justice didn't work, because the people who were getting killed would flame the forums instead of taking the time to build chars (and there was always a place to do this away from pks) and learning the game. Instead the game got softer and softer, wider and wider options, and as a result it's falling apart.


The game needs to progress, but any game that changes your style of play 4-5 times a year due to nerfs and gameplay changes kinda sucks

When pub 16 (and I know I fuss too much about it) it killed about 10 finished chars I had on atl/cats


I was finally going to be able to play the game without skill grind, and you know, it was nice while it lasted.


The UO devs have never been able to make the game balanced.

We APPEAR to only differ on one point. YOU hate Perma Death. I DO NOT.

I played UO from the day it went live until about 8 months after Trammel went live. I strongly view Trammel SAVED UO, STOPED the hemorrhaging of accounts to EverQuest. Read NOTHING more in to it than what I have stated so clearly.

On Everquest, they created a World(AKA Shard) that had PvP and perma death. Perma Death from anything, PC or MoB.

You had a short time to go get your stuff.

The only complaints being made were with the HACKERS and EXPLOITERS. There was an exploit/hack that allowed one to zone in and instantly teleport to you no matter where you were in the zone. There was an exploit/hack that allowed you to INSTA gate no matter what was going on. Be at 1% health? No problem use the hack and you gated (aka RECALL) out.

When coupled with a command /who all, that allowed you to see were people were and what level they were, the ones exploiting like this had a Menu of who to PK and were.

Had those people been removed (no no MMORPG can do this with today's easy credit cards etc) then I have NO DOUBT that the World would have easily been the most popular World in EQ.

It takes some thinking about to actualy see its total impact for BOTH PvP and PvM.

It really does get the Adrenaline pumping. no matter what you do.

OF COURSE the flip side of that coin, was it didn't take you MONTHS to recreate a character, maybe a week, for low middle to middle levels?

IT SURE DID END THE ZERG ATTACKS on Boss Mobs ----- Scratch that ON HIGHER LEVEL Mobs and other Groups of Players.

 

[Canucklehead73]

Well personally I find all rules where you cannot play anymore become silly, be it from losing stats, items or gold... But I understand the concept. I mean so many PvPrs want more PvPrs, but want them to lose thier gear so they have to go craft, hunt and shop for days/weeks/months???

Sure risk vs reward... And always it has to be about players losing thier stuff.

Take it a step further and see how many killers still spout risk vs reward.

Make death mean something? Make death DEATH. :gun:

Awww... don't really want death to mean that much at all really do we?

 

[Nexus]

Well personally I find all rules where you cannot play anymore become silly, be it from losing stats, items or gold... But I understand the concept. I mean so many PvPrs want more PvPrs, but want them to lose thier gear so they have to go craft, hunt and shop for days/weeks/months???

Sure risk vs reward... And always it has to be about players losing thier stuff.

Take it a step further and see how many killers still spout risk vs reward.

Make death mean something? Make death DEATH. :gun:

Awww... don't really want death to mean that much at all really do we?

I'm not a PvPer never really was, but I do believe in Death having penalties. Some games it's XP you lose, in D&D you lost Con for being Rezzed and after it hit 0 the game was up your character was dead. In UO, you loose a bit of gold you can get back in 10 minutes, it has no real risk anymore.. I'd be happy with Statloss (stat not skill) for Reds, and a limit on how often you can rez in a period for everyone so that Death can have real meaning on your game play and you have an actual reward for not dying. Insurance killed the Risk factor of PvP, removal of it would be fitting and no matter how much I want my thief to see packs full of uninsured arties that just isn't going to happen so a viable alternative really needs to be put in place so that the concept of Risk vs Reward will be in play once again.

 

[Violence]

You are looking to penalize a game play style you do not participate in, and fail doubly because you only want reds who participate in that game play style to suffer from those penalties.

You are NOT biased. NO. NEVER.

I don't want you creating more risk than what my rewards are worth.

Seriously guys... The only people FOR such changes including anyone participating in that heated convo about POF and Item Breaking, are Siege players, greedy crafters or simply PvP haters...

Give us a break yeah? Wait 'till SA rebalances the game itself.

 

[Nexus]

You are looking to penalize a game play style you do not participate in, and fail doubly because you only want reds who participate in that game play style to suffer from those penalties.

You are NOT biased. NO. NEVER.

I don't want you creating more risk than what my rewards are worth.

Seriously guys... The only people FOR such changes including anyone participating in that heated convo about POF and Item Breaking, are Siege players, greedy crafters or simply PvP haters...

Give us a break yeah? Wait 'till SA rebalances the game itself.

What asking for penalties that were removed put back? Used to be if you died too often in a short period you couldn't rez for a while....Reds used to suffer statloss as a penalty for being well red. I'm not against them being in towns, I'm not against Reds in Trammel rule areas but I am against no risk involved, not only for PvP but for dying in general. There's no risk at all now, on either side. Heck I play a character that has almost 0 defense because there isn't room on the template, can't give murder counts, can flag Grey for a negative action on a Red, and I still go and invade spawns in Fel alone sometimes with 5-10 people there and consider it fair odds. Do I take a Risk going in to the middle of a spawn like that...no if I die I just get rezed and move on.....do I walk out with a reward for doing so...lots of times but not always yes.

Do I support the way things are on Siege? Kinda I see the overall benefits of it on the entire shard economy. Am I a greedy crafter, no but tell me where any but a select hand ful per shard are gaining anything out of crafting? Do I hate PvP, nope...I accept it's part of the game but since it's Player vs Player as in two intelligent humans not scripted computer AI vs player I think there should be greater rewards and risks when engaging in it.

 

[Draxous]

Seriously guys... The only people FOR such changes including anyone participating in that heated convo about POF and Item Breaking, are Siege players, greedy crafters or simply PvP haters...

Give us a break yeah? Wait 'till SA rebalances the game itself.

Want to try making some sense?

I don't just play Siege and playing on Atlantic has the same level of risk you find on Test Center.

It needs to change.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

And what are you loosing by dying? A few pots? Some bandies and insurance gold...Big risk there......control of a spawn that you'll make up at another time.

I agree that Death needs to mean something, just dying isn't enough, there is ZERO risk to being killed in PvP or PvM for that matter. With Reds having access to towns now, and no stat loss the downsides to PvP have gone away...Now you PvPer's are showing your true colors your just as Care Bear and Pixel Crack junkified as everyone else.

Well TBH when pvping I was quite content looting pots, bandies, boxes, and the occasional powerscroll, guild deed, or perhaps some other rarity. I dont see reason in loosing a suit to a ******** three strikes rule, thats a seige thing completely. What about the joy of the hunt? The kill? Is that not risk vs. reward there?


On Seige your time is spent in building the chars...suits really dont mean much beyond providing you with some resist and if yoru lucky some mods. With production shards you have people who have been working on suits for perhaps up to a couple years or more. This IMO completely kills the risk vs. reward thing because we are discussing the differences between aplpes and oranges. PvP was meant to be an endgame of sorts for people who have spent thier time gathering the stuff tehy wanted or getting the skill they needed. The reward was the thrill of being the victor, regardless of weather you could take someones stuff. Again its for this reason I am content with the insurance and whatever else is in the chars corpse.

Going beyond and stating risk vs. reward doesnt occur anymore is just plain ignorant. (Perhaps ignorant is a strong word, however I think wanting something like this because you dont have good gear is an ignorant reason...personal gain is no reason to change any rule) The game evovled, so the rules did along with it. Again I say if you are not happy with things there are always other games or if you are still die hard into UO play Seige.

 

[Draxous]

On Seige your time is spent in building the chars...suits really dont mean much beyond providing you with some resist and if yoru lucky some mods. With production shards you have people who have been working on suits for perhaps up to a couple years or more. This IMO completely kills the risk vs. reward thing because we are discussing the differences between aplpes and oranges. PvP was meant to be an endgame of sorts for people who have spent thier time gathering the stuff tehy wanted or getting the skill they needed. The reward was the thrill of being the victor, regardless of weather you could take someones stuff. Again its for this reason I am content with the insurance and whatever else is in the chars corpse.

That makes no sense.

You say the reward is the thrill of being the victor, but how are you the victor if you never stop fighting your opponent because death is meaningless?

You don't have to lose your stuff at all. If you lose the fight THREE times and want to risk losing your suit because you think you can win, then you're pursuing the reward of being the victor.

What you're saying doesn't even apply to what I've proposed. The only thing you're saying is that you want to keep the ability to PvP endlessly without breaks or down time no matter how many times you lose or win against an opponent. You think players should be allowed to resurrect and enter back into the fight instantly over and over and over again.

No Thank You.

If mindless combat with no risks or rewards is what people want, then they should be playing on Test Center.

Not on real shards where our actions and hard work are supposed to actually mean something.

 

[Restroom Cowboy]

That makes no sense.

Not on real shards where our actions and hard work are supposed to actually mean something.

Heh...for some reason I get the impression that very little makes sense to you.

On real shards our actions do mean something, you are the victor and get to loot the bodies of those you killed.

BTW...I did agree with the notion of being booted from a fighting area...perhaps the server even upon multiple deaths..but that is different, and you dismissed the notion. I disagree with the insurance tweek, because it only leads to griefing and other possible issues. (what if ur drunk/stoned/forgetful/stupid/or even tired and cant remember the # of times died for instance?)

 

[trammelite]

no, leave insurance as it is. removing insurance would be another nail in the coffin of UO. trammies would never go to fel again, at least not geared up to be able to compete. how should someone ever start pvp'ng when he would need to risk to lose a fortune or dies without a chance because of having the worst gear affordable.
come on, insurance is our friend: trammies can make their first steps in fel because of insurance, while reds get their living out of it.

 

[Korso]

no, leave insurance as it is. removing insurance would be another nail in the coffin of UO. trammies would never go to fel again, at least not geared up to be able to compete. how should someone ever start pvp'ng when he would need to risk to lose a fortune or dies without a chance because of having the worst gear affordable.
come on, insurance is our friend: trammies can make their first steps in fel because of insurance, while reds get their living out of it.

You can tell you havn't been around long. Insurance was the nail in the coffin for UO. Many players left when this was introduced. Like myself, there was no point in playing anymore if there was no excitment about dieing whether to AI or a real person. The reason insurance had to be implimented was because of the rediculous armor and weapons you now have to sit around and hunt for months to obtain.

 

[Wynne]

You can tell you havn't been around long. Insurance was the nail in the coffin for UO. Many players left when this was introduced. Like myself, there was no point in playing anymore if there was no excitment about dieing whether to AI or a real person. The reason insurance had to be implimented was because of the rediculous armor and weapons you now have to sit around and hunt for months to obtain.

No, the MMORPG chart I've seen around shows that more players came after insurance. More after Trammel, too.

Everyone has a crafter. More and more people have a nice suit that they do not want to lose. Loss of durability or loss of items benefits no one, not even the 'crafter' characters....since everyone HAS a crafter!

I don't want changes in death. I already lose that insurance money, bandages, potions, and monster loot unless I can get back to the body in time. NO to losing more, certainly NOT losing my suit that I've spent years making (and it's still not good).

UO IS an item-based game. I don't see that changing anytime soon. That said, item loss itself shouldn't happen upon death and we do have means to prevent it: insurance. Thank goodness.

 

[Nexus]

No, the MMORPG chart I've seen around shows that more players came after insurance. More after Trammel, too.

Everyone has a crafter. More and more people have a nice suit that they do not want to lose. Loss of durability or loss of items benefits no one, not even the 'crafter' characters....since everyone HAS a crafter!

I don't want changes in death. I already lose that insurance money, bandages, potions, and monster loot unless I can get back to the body in time. NO to losing more, certainly NOT losing my suit that I've spent years making (and it's still not good).

UO IS an item-based game. I don't see that changing anytime soon. That said, item loss itself shouldn't happen upon death and we do have means to prevent it: insurance. Thank goodness.

Subscriptions peaked about 5 months after AoS and then started to decline...There area lot of theories on why but one of them is that Insurance took a lot of the challenge out of the game leaving it less fun for many. Now you don't loose anything there's no Risk left involved in Dying in short Risk vs Reward in Fel is non-existant.